Discussion Main / TheRoom

It seems like some of the edits were entirely unnecessary as well.

I actually came in and was curious who'd moved the "Oh hai, [part of page]"...and correctly guessed Fast Eddie. Was anyone even making waves about those, or was it just another royal decree?

I think the latter, but what can you do? Frankly people were running too far with the memes for the page to be comprehensible, if I remember correctly. It obviously needed a clean-up and he did it his own way; there's not really a problem with that. We can carefully rebuild anything that was still funny or important on our own now.

So I just don't sound like I was pointlessly griping (let's be fair, I did), I just have a problem with the habit I see of a page being "sanitised", despite no one suggesting it and the purge not even being suggested beforehand. I like that pages have "character". Cold, sterile, uniform pages are dull.

And it's difficult to "carefully rebuild" a page if you're not sure whether doing so will get you whacked with the ban-hammer. A bit of communication would be nice, cause when a mod swoops in and mass-purges a page, people are a bit hesitant to go back and revert anything, understandably. For example: I loved the "Oh hai X", and thought it was harmless fun and personalised the page. But can I add it?

But you are right, letting a page be overrun with memes and self-references is too far in the other direction. So I suppose it's more the manner and method than the act itself that seems irkish.

P.S. My word I talk a lot.

To be honest I'm not a fan of self-demonstrating anything. Doing it for this page is alienating to others and not very funny to me. This page is hilarious as-is. I can't say I'm too happy about the YMMV decision and that Fast Eddie's efforts to recreate TV Tropes' standards as his own are too conservative in my opinion, but are almost completely agreeable anyway. If we re-added stuff he deleted and submitted good reasons for it, would that really lead to bans? I don't think so. He does not appear to be watchlisting this page, in any case.

In any case, my opinion on the future of this page is just to build on what we have. Throwing up a bunch of in-jokes is liable to make me start deleting them myself. It reminds me too much of those jokers who had to put an unfunny Statler & Waldorf heckle on every damn page.

I suppose it's a question of degrees - I totally get your point, but I for one think there's room for self-demonstrating articles, as long as they don't run away from themselves (which, to be fair, does have a habit of occuring). As for ban hammer...well, perhaps exaggeration, but he's gotten very abrupt with his actions the past wee while, and erring on the side of caution...

Ohh Tommy Wiseau. Will you ever stop inciting such deep and meaningful discussions? I think not!

self-demonstrating trope pages can be okay. I just think making self-demonstrating works pages is asking for trouble and ought to be avoided.

That is rather open to interpretation.

Easily, they could have thought it was "what type of money?" (i.e. Dollars, Yen, Euroes, Pounds Sterling), I guess since it makes about as much sense as anything else in this movie.

Because that's a way of phrasing it someone fluent in English would never use, making it that much more confusing. And doesn't she ask it twice?

The whole scene comes off as ad libbed to me. It's like Juliette Danielle had to be very angry but just yelled nonsensical things because she wasn't sure how to carry it on.

Only to avoid spoilers specific to the game....but would we really want to have that much about the game on this page? I say no.

People have already scattered game-specific examples throughout the page, though.

I say we do it! If The Critic and Rifftrax have their own section, why not the Newgrounds game?

Has anybody found all 6 things I wish I could unsee? I only found the first, Greg in the hot tub.

Well, I found three. Mark in the hot tub with the old woman, Mark worshiping his beard and The old woman blowing up a balloon in a horrifying fashion.

what is there to explain? it's weird and absurdist and ironic, just like every other aspect of the film. have you visited the official site yet, where they have one of his eyes glowing?

I dont think we can say he is because even though his performances leans that way, nobody responds to him as if he is. So it's more of an acting problem than his actual character.

And a writing problem and possibly a culture problem (if we can ever pin down his origins)

Well, then I guess it's a completely unintentional example. He was attempted as a serious character, but just accidentally came off as being too silly and nonsensical.